ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Valid Church Traditions

Name all the church traditions practiced today that don't contradict the scriptures.

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The False Traditions Bible Quiz
 ---Mike on 9/19/10
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



\\You assume that you have all the facts and should not be doubted.\\

Well, you're doing the same thing.

I DO have a lot of facts at my fingertips about Church history. Most Eastern Christians have to in order to survive around people with a Western-centrist (Roman Catholic or Protestant) set of assumptions.

||I am extreemly comfortable of Who I know.||

That should be WHOM. ++Wink++

Though I've noticed that if people can't spell key words properly, they generally do not know how to use the facts involving such words.
---Cluny on 9/26/10


Cluny, any uncomfortableness is I may be a bit sensitive to my spelling. I felt like I was back at school getting graded on homework rather than on content.

I am extreemly comfortable of Who I know.

I love the challenges of giving and receiving accurate information. If I have wrong facts, I double check them. Facts are facts, and I love facts. My faith in Jesus Christ has nothing to be afraid of.

The problem is getting correct facts. You assume that you have all the facts and should not be doubted. However, one reason I respond to you is because you have many facts and have thought about things. Although, I believe you have a major bias because you have given yourself to RCC/Orthodox history and teachings.
---Rod4Him on 9/26/10


\\luny

"[23] Thus says the LORD, Let not a wise man boast of his wisdom, .......
---Rod4Him on 9/25/10\\

Are you feeling a bit uncomfortable because I might be better informed in some things than you, or that I simply don't surrender when you fire your first shot?

** Rome either received half the proceeds, or half the land in Catholic territories in the Americas.**

Glenn, can you provide support for this claim?

"It's common knowledge" or similar responses are not evidence.

Please see what I said elsewhere about the difference between people's ideas about things and what they actually know.
---Cluny on 9/26/10


Cluny

"[23] Thus says the LORD, Let not a wise man boast of his wisdom, and let not the mighty man boast of his might, let not a rich man boast of his riches, [24]but let him who boasts boast of this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am the LORD who exercises lovingkindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for I delight in these things, declares the LORD."
---Rod4Him on 9/25/10


Cluny, 9/24: "Please give an historical example of people forced to pay tithes--that is, as understood today of 10%--by the Roman Catholic Church." Cleverly written. And some say that the Jesuit's do the art of 'disinformation' better than the Soviets did. Often in Catholic lands, the Vatican didn't directly raise armies, enforce laws, or collect a Tithe. But it did use the might of the State to do so. Rome either received half the proceeds, or half the land in Catholic territories in the Americas. Technically not a tithe - 50% percent. The indigenous peoples however, were forced to pay 10 percent of any non-native produce.
---Glenn on 9/25/10




///Name all the church traditions practiced today that don't contradict the scriptures.///

Hmmmm
---michael_e on 9/25/10


\\Counsel of Toledo\\

This is a local council, and was never enforced elsewhere--especially in the USA.

BTW--you'd be more likely to get taken seriously if you'd spell properly.
---Cluny on 9/25/10


Counsel of Toledo

It is well known that tithes were levied from the earliest times in the Christian era, and Pope Gregory I made a division of the proceeds of the tithe among the following: (a) the bishop, (b) the parish clergy, (c) church fabric, (d) the poor.

33. Avarice is the root of all evil, and its thirst grips even the minds of the priests.... Therefore, it is decreed by the present council that they shall not presume to take away these things by right but, according to the decrees of former councils, they shall have a third part of the offerings as well as of the tithes and of the products of the fields.
---Rod4Him on 9/25/10


\\p.s. Cluny, 9/22: "Nobody was ever forced to tithe in the Roman Catholic Church." Lie!

---Glenn on 9/24/10\\

Please give an historical example of people forced to pay tithes--that is, as understood today of 10%--by the Roman Catholic Church.

It has never put the emphasis on tithing that Protestants have.
---Cluny on 9/24/10


Baptism in water, operating in the gifts of the Spirit, the 0ffice(s) of Bishop / Elder, and Deacons, the taking of communion, a communal meal, the giving of alms and offerings, and various passages on church discipline. None of these are of value to those who do not depend on Jesus, and His atoning sacrifice on the cross (without addition), to save them. Matthew 23:10-11, Acts 19:3-6, 20:28, 1Corinthians 10:16, 11:20-34, chapters 12-14, Ephesians 4:4-13, Philippians 1:1, 1Timothy 3:1-13, Titus 1:5-9, Hebrews 10:24-25, 1Peter 3:21.
p.s. Cluny, 9/22: "Nobody was ever forced to tithe in the Roman Catholic Church." Lie!

---Glenn on 9/24/10




John Foxe also conveniently omitted mentioning that Protestants tortured and killed Roman Catholics when they got the chance.
---Cluny on 9/24/10


Iohn Foxe, a Protestant from the 16th Century, was an excellent historian. Iohn Foxe provides reliable facts of the early Church leaders/martyrs/Constantine (and yes, he was a Christian Emperour)/the prophecy of Revelation 20/and many other testimonies. His historical book has over 2,000 pages!

I read his book, The Actes and Monuments of Martyrs (1563, 1570, 1576, and 1583). I would suggest that Christians do the same.

Iohn Foxe has wrongly been ignored of the 21st Century Protestants (and I speak that to the provocation of Protestants).
---Kev on 9/24/10


//Philip Schaff, a German Calvinist, was an excellent historian. When he deals with simple facts, he is trustworthy. As an Orthodox, I don't have to agree with his interpretation of the facts (which is another issue).//

I'll take note of both of your suggested authors, and I agree with your statement as I understand it... I want the facts...then I can decide what to do with them. That's why I read the "church father's" writings directly rather than what someone has to say about them, although I occasionally do that.

I still consider the source as they'll have a bias even if they use sources.

Josephus was a good historian, but he also had a bias.
---Rod4Him on 9/23/10


\\The RCC would present history with their bias the same each persuasion would have theirs. That's why I read different sources. It's like reading only Mormon literature to only read RCC. Would you read only Protestant literature for historical information?\\

If I'm looking for historical information, I first make sure the author knows what he is talking about.

Philip Schaff, a German Calvinist, was an excellent historian. When he deals with simple facts, he is trustworthy. As an Orthodox, I don't have to agree with his interpretation of the facts (which is another issue).

Thomas Walsh quotes primary sources. Do the things you read do that?
---Cluny on 9/23/10


//When I was a Baptist (back before I got saved),//

:) I understand.

//Were these people being and manipulated by Baptist ministers? Or is it only Catholics who do that?//

Yes!! They were being manipulated. They probably copied the Catholics, doing the same things they accuse the Catholics of doing, tithing, "pastor" as a mini pope, and they have their own rules.

//Thomas Walsh is a Roman Catholic. Should that matter?//

I assumed correctly. The RCC would present history with their bias the same each persuasion would have theirs. That's why I read different sources. It's like reading only Mormon literature to only read RCC. Would you read only Protestant literature for historical information?
---Rod4Him on 9/23/10


\\cluny, if you lived in a society where everyone was taught to be "christian" and the "church" ruled, and the church taught that one must give tithes or they would go to hell and damnation, that would feel like being forced. Sensibilities of the time, remember.\\

When I was a Baptist (back before I got saved), I heard many sermons on tithing, teaching that if you did not tithe to that particular church, you were in danger of losing your salvation.

Were these people being and manipulated by Baptist ministers? Or is it only Catholics who do that?

\\Do I assume that William Walsh is Catholic,\\

Thomas Walsh is a Roman Catholic. Should that matter?
---Cluny on 9/23/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


cluny, if you lived in a society where everyone was taught to be "christian" and the "church" ruled, and the church taught that one must give tithes or they would go to hell and damnation, that would feel like being forced. Sensibilities of the time, remember.

Do I assume that William Walsh is Catholic, and he is writing from the RCC point of view?

When I study/read, I try to read different sources, but I guess the RCC has the "right" historical record and truth. Some things never change, the RCC is always right and has always been right.
---Rod4Him on 9/23/10


\\"Forced" may be a bit strong, but everybody was taught that the only way to heaven was if the RCC let them. They were also told that if they didn't tithe they would go to hell and eternal damnation.\\

Make up your mind, Rod4Him.

Either the Roman Catholic Church required tithing, or it did not.

You can't have it both ways.

As far as rewriting history, you're believing the Black Legend.

I suggest you read ISABELLA OF SPAIN: THE LAST CRUSADER and CHARACTERS OF THE INQUISITION, both by Thomas Walsh.
---Cluny on 9/23/10


//Nobody was ever forced to tithe in the Roman Catholic Church.//

"Forced" may be a bit strong, but everybody was taught that the only way to heaven was if the RCC let them. They were also told that if they didn't tithe they would go to hell and eternal damnation.

Mild for the times?? and a bit of rewriting history.

These discussions remind me of conversations with Mormons. They either rewrite history or justify it.

So let me get this straight...inquisitions are ok, particularly for the time?
---Rod4Him on 9/22/10


Just because one does not like something that relates to Holy Tradition (such as signing oneself with the cross, which is a ancient Christian practice) does not give him or her the right to tell Christians NOT to do it.

In any case, making the sign of the cross is not anti-biblical, and many non-Catholic/Orthodox do it all the time. But it does bring hate/anger to the enemies of the Truth.

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 9/22/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


\\In the medival period, people were compelled to be "christian and give tithes" ...\\

Nobody was ever forced to tithe in the Roman Catholic Church.

\\In Spain in 1492, Jews were compelled to become Christian, leave the country, or be exterminated.\\

This is a popular misconception. Actually, the Inquisition was only after those who had made a pro-forma conversion to Catholicism (from either Judaism or mahometanism) but were still practicing their old religions.

Jews who had always been known as Jews were left alone.Jews were expelled because so many were engaged in plots against the crown.

Rather mild for the times.
---Cluny on 9/22/10


Who is being compelled? What does the Catholic/Orthodox expect (compel) to do?

In the medival period, people were compelled to be "christian and give tithes" under the threat of hell, damnation, and death by the RCC.

In Spain in 1492, Jews were compelled to become Christian, leave the country, or be exterminated.

What today does the RCC/Orthodox want people to do?

I believe the Apostle Paul wanted people to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ--death-burial-resurrection, and not necessarily to do a lot of formats and religious rituals.
---Rod4Him on 9/22/10


The subject of this blog is about church traditions that do NOT contradict scripture.
---Cluny on 9/22/10

We could take the extreme and say that ALL traditions are permissable, based upon this Scripture:

1 Cor 6:12 "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything"

But is that what we want?
---Mark_Eaton on 9/22/10


\\By compelling people to perform your traditions and by making your traditions equal to Scripture in authority\\

Who is being compelled to make the sign of the Cross, or otherwise follow Apostolic Orthodox tradition? Be specific, please.

The subject of this blog is about church traditions that do NOT contradict scripture.

Apparently, you are trying to come up with reasons to make signing oneself un-Biblical.
---Cluny on 9/22/10


Shop For Christian Books


Now, please tell me how this goes against the Bible, which is the subject of this thread.
---Cluny on 9/22/10

Easy.

By compelling people to perform your traditions and by making your traditions equal to Scripture in authority, you make your traditions into doctrine for the followers of your church. Doing do introduces error into the doctrine and your doctrine then becomes another gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is the error of LDS and other bodies that have incorporated things other than Scripture into their doctrine.
---Mark_Eaton on 9/22/10


You can preach the Cross with words, or you can preach it with images, or you can preach it with your hands by tracing it on yourself.

In any way, it's still FOOLISHNESS to those who are perishing.

BTW--did you know that Baptists in Russia make the sign of the Cross?

Now, please tell me how this goes against the Bible, which is the subject of this thread.
---Cluny on 9/22/10


---Donna5535 it might be good for you not to look too closely at some of your fellow bloggers.
---mima on 9/20/10

mima, I've been In Christ Jesus for 27 years.

I know how to "eat the chicken and spit out the bones." Meaning I line everyting up with the Word of God. If it's not in the Word, I don't do it and I don't believe it. The sign of the cross is NOT in the bible. It's a thing the Catholic folks made up, probably the same priests who molested little boys.....so sad. My heart just breaks right now!! Lord Jesus, come quickly Lord.
---Donna5535 on 9/22/10


"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

If an astute person would take out all the prepositional phrases and the "who" clause, the verse would read:

"For the word is foolishness [to those who are perishing], but to us [who are being saved] it is the power of God."

So, what is the subject? The Word.
---Steveng on 9/21/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


//It is the preaching of the word of the cross, or the preaching of the Lord's death, or the preaching of the cross, that is foolishness to those who are perishing. Not the English word of "cross".//

Mark is absolutely correct.

Again, notice how some change the clear understanding of English to suit their religious system.

"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

One can read the context of I Corin., and it is the message of the cross that is foolishness. Sure one can do the "sign," but doing it can easily be just a "form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."
---Rod4Him on 9/21/10


Actually, that's EXACTLY how it reads (The very word "Cross"...) in the Slavonic NT, which predates the KJV by at least 800 years.
---Cluny on 9/21/10

Yes, if you read it out of context.

In context it reads:

1 Cor 1:17-18,23 "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God...but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness"
---Mark_Eaton on 9/21/10


\\No, no, no, that is not what the verse in 1 Corinthians means.\\

Actually, that's EXACTLY how it reads (The very word "Cross"...) in the Slavonic NT, which predates the KJV by at least 800 years.
---Cluny on 9/21/10


Even sign of the cross does not contradict the scriptures
---francis on 9/21/10

I agree. However, how is the practice substantiated or confirmed? This is the problem with tradition.

There is no way to quantify if God does or does not wants me to do tradition. According to Jewish tradition, God does not even want us to write His name, let alone make the sign of His cross in front of our chest.

What does this external crossing symbol say other than "Praise God, We give you all the Glory, We give You all the Praise". I prefer to say that aloud so others can hear. Not for my pride, but for His glory.
---Mark_Eaton on 9/21/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture


If the very word "Cross" is foolishness to those who are perishing, how much more so is its image, or even tracing it?
---Cluny on 9/20/10

No, no, no, that is not what the verse in 1 Corinthians means.

It is the preaching of the word of the cross, or the preaching of the Lord's death, or the preaching of the cross, that is foolishness to those who are perishing. Not the English word of "cross".

You should study the Word of God more and the traditions less.
---Mark_Eaton on 9/21/10


\\,if you mean the pope,and other catholic leaders parading around in gold crowns\\

Catholic leaders, including the pope, do not "parade around in gold crowns."

Where did you get that idea?
---Cluny on 9/21/10


Name all the church traditions practiced today that don't contradict the scriptures.

the way the question is written, it is hard to come up with any traditions that don't contradict the scriptures.

Even sign of the cross doe snot contradict the scriptures
---francis on 9/21/10


thanks for the verses micha,

The verses are peaceable and gentle and easy to be entreated.

The RCC stuff is confusing, oppressing, and full of intellectual knowledge, which is not edifying to the soul.
---Rod4Him on 9/21/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops


1Cor 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
1Cor 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Rom 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
Phi 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things [are] honest, whatsoever things [are] just, whatsoever things [are] pure, whatsoever things [are] lovely, whatsoever things [are] of good report, if [there be] any virtue, and if [there be] any praise, think on these things.
---micha9344 on 9/21/10


//Cabesh? That means understand? in Italian//

cabesh is not the italian word for 'understand?'...capice?
---aka on 9/20/10


Where in the Bible does it say not to wear special underwear, where does it say not to bow to Mecca? shall I go on?

If the Bible doesn't forbid something, that means we SHOULD it?

Notice...another rule.
---Rod4Him on 9/20/10


traditions that contradict scripture?Iam not sure what you are asking,if you mean the pope,and other catholic leaders parading around in gold crowns,along with a seemingly endless array of traditions at hand,then yes these remind me of pharisees jesus meet during his life.
---tom2 on 9/21/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer


\\Where in the BIBLE does it tell us to make the sign of the cross?\\

Where in the Bible does this contradict Scripture, Donna?

THAT is the question of this blog.

If the very word "Cross" is foolishness to those who are perishing, how much more so is its image, or even tracing it?
---Cluny on 9/20/10


Notice the rules and regulations that should up on this blog? which have nothing to do with loving God and loving one another, but have a form of godliness. Many religions offer formates and supposed piety.

The issue is Christ in you the hope of glory. Amen?
---Rod4Him on 9/20/10


I assume the questioner is the same Mike who posted at the same time on the "Do you fear God" blog.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/20/10


Donna5535,

1) Sola Scriptura, the principle you adhere to, is not in the Bible. The topic is about which traditions do not contradict Scriptures, not which traditions can not be found in Scriptures. Infant Baptism and making the sign of he cross (attested in 2nd century church writings) is part of the Apostolic (Oral) Tradition, although several Scriptures allude to it.

2) Scriptures such Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 (connecting to Col 2:11-12, which teach Baptism is the New Circumcision), Acts 2:39, 10:47-48, 16:15, 33, all refers to Infant Baptism (indirectly) and the Early Christians understood that (i.e., ancient catacombs icons attest to it, etc).

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 9/20/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting


---Donna5535 it might be good for you not to look too closely at some of your fellow bloggers.
---mima on 9/20/10


I read the question as to what the scriptures don't say than as to what the scriptures say.
Mark 9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
Luke 9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid [him] not: for he that is not against us is for us.
Though alot of traditions may not be biblical, nevertheless, many of those do not go against scripture either.
These, I believe are what Mike is questioning about.
There is a difference between not being found in the Bible and antibiblical.
Unbiblical seems to mean either depending on who and how it is being used.
---micha9344 on 9/20/10


Sure Mike,

1.corporate prayer
2.corporate praise
3.the assembly of saints.


Easy but good question.
---larry on 9/20/10


Baptism of infants, and by triple immersion.

Sign of the Cross.
---Cluny on 9/20/10

Cluny, you know I love and respect you, right?

Where in the BIBLE does it tell us to make the sign of the cross? Because I try to follow God's word to the tee and I'm in sin if I should have been making the sign of the cross all these years. It's not in the bible.

Neither is Baptism of infants. Who was Baptized as an infant in the bible?

A child wouldn't even know they were baptized, so how could that be a sign they're dying to their old way of life? if they haven't even lived life yet? Cabesh? That means understand? in Italian...lol
---Donna5535 on 9/20/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


The Eucharist every Sunday.

Baptism of infants, and by triple immersion.

Sign of the Cross.

These are just a few.

Actually, all the Orthodox traditions are practical applications of what the Scriptures say.
---Cluny on 9/20/10


The Apostolic (Holy) Tradition (all of it) can be found in Orthodoxy, uncorrupted.

Saint Basil the Great "On the Holy Spirit" (available online) (Chapter 27, 66-67a) explained it well.

In IC.XC.,
---Ignatius on 9/19/10


For there's No contradiction here.

For The Man - made trin relig org's churches beginning with the rcc & her offspring daughters churches, their worship Matt.15 v 9 & that came from here, 2nd. Cor.11 v's 14 - 15.
---Lawrence on 9/20/10


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.